Wright writes.....

[micklner]

Google search

 

LNER Sleeper with HD Bogies

 

https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/R4174-U01_3221399_Qty1_1.jpg

 

3rd with normal

 

https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/r4172b_1.jpg

[it's-er]

Well Ive looked at the photos immediately above, and I am left with Mr King's comment at post 10,832 above that "from all but close viewing distances one 4mm scale black grimy Gresley bogie looks very much like another"! I really can't see the difference between these bogies on the 2 Hornby coaches, except that the lower one has a bogie step!

 

John

[MikeTrice]

H/D bogies have a deeper bogie sideframe at 1'1" at the pivot compared with 10" for a std bogie. From memory the Hornby bogies are the same however they have different rivet patterns. Later Hornby Gresley's had the central beading position corrected.

[Headstock]

Why would people want to fit the wrong bogie? I don't understand.

[MikeTrice]

Best I can come up with. Heavy duty on left, standard on right:

[Mallard60022]

Best I can come up with. Heavy duty on left, standard on right:

Bogie Comparison.jpg

....and lo, the bulb...., can anyone really see the 'bulb'? (Damn fine shopped pic though and really shows the difference; thanks MT)

I shall now be ever so naughty and mention that some coaches had HD one end and Standard at the other. Without checking I think that was to do with weight of certain cars with kitchen equipment at one end?

Moretolife Thanbogies

[t-b-g]

It is one of those things that has to be down to the personal choice of the individual, whether or not they feel that putting heavy duty bogies on when appropriate is worth the effort.

 

The error is around 25% of the depth of the main bogie side frame. That 25% is only about 1mm on the model.

 

A few years ago, RTR models were produced with totally wrong bogies, with BR bogies appearing under LMS vehicles etc. I like to think that we have moved on from those days but perhaps this is one area where modellers can have some personal input and make their RTR model a little bit better than it was when it came out of the box.

[MikeTrice]

Here is the "bulb":

[Headstock]

There is so much wrong with the Hornby Gresleys from underframe, end profile, gangways, battery boxes and in some cases bogies, etc etc. When one is stood alongside the likes of the MJT product I am reminded of Danny Davito and Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie twins.

[Headstock]

Hornby MJT conversion, the advantage over the full kit I have found is that it is cheaper, quicker to build and not as heavy. This is probably the most expensive type of conversion because it has more door furniture and turnbuckle trussing. End door types with angle iron are quite a bit cheaper.

 

P.S. Sorry about the camera distortion but the light was good.

[cctransuk]

Best I can come up with. Heavy duty on left, standard on right:

Bogie Comparison.jpg

 

Having rescaled the photo to 4mm. scale, I am quite satisfied that a strip of 1mm. thick plastic card, blended into the underside of the frames of standard RTR bogies, and with some slices of plastic rod to reproduce the slightly larger spring hanger detail, will be more than convincing enough for me, IF I find that the use of RTR standard bogies offends my eye.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[MikeTrice]

You did not need to scale them. I already commented that there was a 3" difference in height.

 

Andrew, that coach looks brilliant. How did you do the "teak"?

[cctransuk]

You did not need to scale them. I already commented that there was a 3" difference in height.

 

Andrew, that coach looks brilliant. How did you do the "teak"?

Mike,

 

Quite correct - but I instinctively translate this type of photo to 4mm. scale for future reference.

 

Regards,

John isherwood.

[Mallard60022]

Here is the "bulb":

IMG_0945s.JPG

Ah..........................I can see the 'bulb'. Thank you. Unbelievably I have never noticed that before.

Phil

[Headstock]

You did not need to scale them. I already commented that there was a 3" difference in height.

 

Andrew, that coach looks brilliant. How did you do the "teak"?

Hi Mike,

 

Thank you very much for the kind words. An article is in progress, it is basically requires editing and a little bit of rewriting, I like to keep things concise but hopefully entertaining. I've had to push the submission back as mentioned above, but due to the interest generated it will receive top priority following LSGC next exhibition in about a weeks time. Currently, I am engaged in the less glamorous activity of wheel cleaning, I wonder if there is an article in that?

[Brian Kirby]

Having rescaled the photo to 4mm. scale, I am quite satisfied that a strip of 1mm. thick plastic card, blended into the underside of the frames of standard RTR bogies, and with some slices of plastic rod to reproduce the slightly larger spring hanger detail, will be more than convincing enough for me, IF I find that the use of RTR standard bogies offends my eye.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Yes, I used 1mm/40thou square plastic strip on my bodge, before that went on, I had to file away some bracket detail and remove the centre dampers temporarily.      BK

[Rail-Online]

Best I can come up with. Heavy duty on left, standard on right:

Bogie Comparison.jpg

Thanks Mike - are the actual axleboxes different sizes or is it just the photos?

 

Tony

[MikeTrice]

The H/D will be larger.

[Ian Smeeton]

Where's Tony?

 

Regards

 

Ian

[Barry O]

He's busy doing some photographic wizardry I believe..

[LNER4479]

... before lying down in a darkened room to recover from the experience.

[Willie Whizz]

Why would people want to fit the wrong bogie? I don't understand.

 

The key word in your question is "fit".

 

If one is building a 'kit' (whether complete from a single supplier or bringing together a series of unassembled components) then clearly one would aspire to 100% accuracy and - given (a) the knowledge that a choice was required and (b) the availability of options to make that choice - would select the Heavy bogie to fit to models where that was appropriate. Why subject to those 'givens' would one do otherwise, I agree.

 

But this discussion is primarily about modifying Hornby carriages with sides and components from other suppliers, and the extent to which an acceptable result can be obtained by modellers who may not have the time, skill, money or inclination; or maybe what they do have is more pressing priorities in life or in modelling (like just getting a blooming layout built at all, in my own case!) that means acceptable short-cuts have to be taken.  What that means will vary between individual modellers of course.  For some of us, 'good enough' just has to be 'good enough' - what Tony summarises in his concept of the 'layout coach'.

 

Which in the present instance is where this business of the bogies seems critical.  We are not so much looking at 'fitting' bogies here but at what may need to be done to the Hornby ones - unless they are going to be so very poor they simply have to be discarded and replaced outright.  I had been persuaded previously that the standard Hornby bogie was close enough to pass muster unaltered under a restaurant car etc. from 'normal viewing distances'.  The current discussions have now convinced me that actually a small modification will make a useful improvement with minimal cost in time, effort and money - probably sufficient to pass muster with 98% of anybody who might get to see the outcome unless they specifically scrutinised it very closely for this specific purpose from a distance of a few inches.  And that will allow me more time and money to spend on something that does need more work to produce an acceptable outcome.  Which is, as far as I'm concerned, A Result!

 

Thanks to all who have offered their comments; much appreciated.

[Headstock]

The key word in your question is "fit".

 

If one is building a 'kit' (whether complete from a single supplier or bringing together a series of unassembled components) then clearly one would aspire to 100% accuracy and - given (a) the knowledge that a choice was required and (b) the availability of options to make that choice - would select the Heavy bogie to fit to models where that was appropriate. Why subject to those 'givens' would one do otherwise, I agree.

 

But this discussion is primarily about modifying Hornby carriages with sides and components from other suppliers, and the extent to which an acceptable result can be obtained by modellers who may not have the time, skill, money or inclination; or maybe what they do have is more pressing priorities in life or in modelling (like just getting a blooming layout built at all, in my own case!) that means acceptable short-cuts have to be taken.  What that means will vary between individual modellers of course.  For some of us, 'good enough' just has to be 'good enough' - what Tony summarises in his concept of the 'layout coach'.

 

Which in the present instance is where this business of the bogies seems critical.  We are not so much looking at 'fitting' bogies here but at what may need to be done to the Hornby ones - unless they are going to be so very poor they simply have to be discarded and replaced outright.  I had been persuaded previously that the standard Hornby bogie was close enough to pass muster unaltered under a restaurant car etc. from 'normal viewing distances'.  The current discussions have now convinced me that actually a small modification will make a useful improvement with minimal cost in time, effort and money - probably sufficient to pass muster with 98% of anybody who might get to see the outcome unless they specifically scrutinised it very closely for this specific purpose from a distance of a few inches.  And that will allow me more time and money to spend on something that does need more work to produce an acceptable outcome.  Which is, as far as I'm concerned, A Result!

 

Thanks to all who have offered their comments; much appreciated.

 

I was referring to the Hornby sleeping car. As I have mentioned before what folk get up to with their own modeling is their choice and nothing to do with me beyond an interest in what they are doing. After all, Hornby is a product manufacturer after our dosh so I don't have a problem engaging that product with a critical eye. If modelers are inspired to modify their bogies as a result of the above conversation that can only be a positive thing, I look forwards to seeing the results.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

'Bogies - the new track gauge thread?' Discuss.

[Tony Wright]

He's busy doing some photographic wizardry I believe..

I have indeed, Barry.

 

What an impressive layout to photograph as well - a scale model of Carlisle in EM. By 'scale', I mean as near as makes no difference; as much as one can fit into a 30 metre-long (yes, 30 metres!) building. 

 

There is a dual self-imposed embargo on any pictures (it's going in the RM next year), but it taxed by photographic 'abilities' to the limit (how does one light such a vast system?), but with my wonderful wife's help (firing flashguns all over the place during 15 seconds exposures), we did it. 

 

Seeing such a tremendous layout, with great work on it by many top modellers - yourself included - (and miles of plain track laying by the owner, so he is a contributor as well) impressed upon me what can be achieved given the space and resources. I even contributed to it - re-wheeling more Larry Goddard carriages than I've ever seen in one place before (over 100?), repairing wagons, re-wheeling umpteen Bachmann Mk.1s, making non-running locos run and painting part of a backscene.

 

Oh, and this was the best bit - DCC which works! Well, almost. We still had the stray run-away and the odd non-response, but (and it's me saying this!), I don't think it would be possible to run this layout without DCC. Mike Edge's wiring is thorough in the extreme, so it does work. Several of Mike's locos romped round on extremely-heavy trains, the likes of which no RTR conversion would look at. But, this is the clincher for me; all the signals and points are controlled by analogue, the switches strategically placed to mimic the signal box positions. Just like the real thing.

 

Along with Retford, I've never seen anything so impressive - scale modelling at its very best! The over 1,300 miles round trip was well worth it and we were regally looked after. 

Edited July 30, 2016 by Tony Wright